Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KTG119

Tom Brands contract extension

Recommended Posts

What stands out to me is the hypocrisy of giving Brands an extension for essentially the same results that got Zalesky fired. The recent recruting and influx of resources to HWC most likely did play a big factor in this extension however that was reactionary to what other programs have already done so Brands will continue to be behind the curve. My personal opinion is that he is an excellent tactician but not a very good strategic planner. Iowa was still the premier program in college wrestling when he took over and have had three #1 recruiting classes this decade yet they have steadily declined over his tenure.

 

In the end I just don't think he is as good a coach as some other people do and there are viable alternatives out there. Certainly not saying he is a bad coach, obviously he is a good coach, just that I don't think he is elite. Put Dresser, Koll, Brian Smith, Manning or a guy like Flynn at Iowa with their resources and history and I think they would be in a better place then they are right now. Heck even younger guys like Eggum, Cunningham, Burroughs or Pritzlaff would be legitimate alternatives at this point.

Edited by Flying-Tiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm...Cletus and FT make some good points, especially about going for a coach with non-Iowa roots.  The Hawkeyes have had a former team member as their head coach since 1972.  (And all four won multiple championships.)  Immediately before that, the Hawks were led by highly-regarded Dave McCuskey, who took the helm in 1953.  McCuskey was a Northern Iowa graduate, who had led the Panthers to the NCAA title in 1950.  I'm not sure about the intervening coaches between Iowa's first coach, E.G. Schroeder and McCuskey, but Schroeder also had Iowa roots.  Wikipedia says he attended Simpson College (Indianola, Iowa) and then "went to the University of Iowa in 1907 to study medicine but soon got involved in coaching at Iowa as well."

 

Has Iowa become somewhat trapped by their own storied tradition - and are now too parochial for their own good? 

Just asking.

Edited by HurricaneWrestling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other two coaches in Iowa's history are Pat Wright and Mike Howard.  Wright coached for a few seasons between 1915 and 1920 and is the only one with a losing record (3-5-1).  Mike Howard  coached from 1921-22 to 1951-52 and had a 90-69-11 record. 

 

Also, Iowa's media guide lists the coach for the 1918-1919 as "unavailable."  Wright coached the preceding and following seasons so maybe it was him.  At any rate, Iowa only had one dual that year, a 14-26 loss to Iowa State.

 

If anybody has background info on Wright, Howard or the 1918-19 coach, please post it.  Maybe they also had connections to Iowa prior to becoming head coaches there.  Hell, maybe every head coach in the 107-year history of the program has been an Iowan - in one way or another.

Edited by HurricaneWrestling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between Brands and Zalesky has to do with the culture of the program.  Brands espouses Gable philosophy with his own spin while Zalesky appeared uncertain when Iowa began to slip.  And given Zalesky's solid, unspectacular work at Oregon State, it's hard to argue with a straight face that Tom Brands isn't the better coach for the Hawkeyes.  The biggest issue facing Iowa today is the emergence of PSU--same as every other major program.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Brands solid, unspectacular work at Va Tech, I disagree. Furthermore, how can you compare with a straight face the resources and name recognition of Iowa or any other of the wrestling powers with Oregon State?

 

Your claim that Iowa's biggest issue is the emergence of Penn State is also rather dubious considering Iowa has finished behind one or more teams other then Penn State every season for the past 7 years. 

 

I do agree that Brands is more their type of guy, Zalesky was a bit too reserved and cerebral for their fan base. I am also willing to concede that the use of hypocrisy may have been a bit too strong a word and that maybe this extension is more an acknowledgment that the landscape of college wrestling has changed since the Gable era and fielding a perennial top 5 team is now sufficient for job security. Certainly a luxury Zalesky never had but I get it. 

Edited by Flying-Tiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When is the hypothetical dual? If it's in late February Lee gets 6 on Schwarm and I could see Alber getting beat at 141. Sorensen and Kemerer + possibly Marinelli. Downey and Stoll would win as well.

There will be no dual.  Hasn't happened for at least four years.  From all that I know, the hangup seems to be on the Iowa end, as Schwab has been asking for the dual since the annual tradition ended,all to no avail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If it's in late February Lee gets 6 on Schwarm

I'd let him get some collegiate experience under his belt first before I'd declare him pinning Schwarm; simply wouldn't happen.  Schwarm's a heck of a lot better than that.  He wrestled most of last year for us at 125 and did a great job.  I know that Lee, being untested at this level, would have a bit of a "conundrum" underneath Schwarm, to put it lightly.  :)

Edited by ban basketball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

c'mon now you know there's more to the recruiting visit/football game than the actual outcome of said game.

Of course there is, but that was a great game. Im sure they enjoyed it. Atmosphere was terrific.

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just impressed to see so many unaffiliated people concerned about a man's job and the health of the Iowa wrestling program.  Truly warms the cockles.

 

Just shows what a fine bunch of caring individuals frequent this board - and its good to see you acknowledging them, Vak.  That said, you should probably refrain from talking about your cockles.  Impressionable youngsters are also known to read these posts.

Edited by HurricaneWrestling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What stands out to me is the hypocrisy of giving Brands an extension for essentially the same results that got Zalesky fired. The recent recruting and influx of resources to HWC most likely did play a big factor in this extension however that was reactionary to what other programs have already done so Brands will continue to be behind the curve. My personal opinion is that he is an excellent tactician but not a very good strategic planner. Iowa was still the premier program in college wrestling when he took over and have had three #1 recruiting classes this decade yet they have steadily declined over his tenure.

 

In the end I just don't think he is as good a coach as some other people do and there are viable alternatives out there. Certainly not saying he is a bad coach, obviously he is a good coach, just that I don't think he is elite. Put Dresser, Koll, Brian Smith, Manning or a guy like Flynn at Iowa with their resources and history and I think they would be in a better place then they are right now. Heck even younger guys like Eggum, Cunningham, Burroughs or Pritzlaff would be legitimate alternatives at this point.

 

 

The release doesn't say anything about what his buyout is.  I doubt it is very much, especially for as big of a budget as the Iowa AD has.  This extension was 100% about him being able to tell recruits that he'll be there until they graduate and I don't think it should be taken as anything more or less than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry man thought you were being sarcastic. mea culpa

 

 

No, they created an incredible atmosphere for that game. Kinnick was loud as can be. If I were an Iowa recruit in any sport and I was at that game Saturday night I'd have been impressed DESPITE the fact they lost on the final play. Seriously, what more could have been asked for. Ferentz put them into position to win that game against a team that most college football experts would say is a superior team.

 

I did not expect Iowa to be able to stay with PSU in that game, so I was totally impressed by what I saw from them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you not know what hypothetical means?

Sure, I do, but my response was to you asking me WHEN this hypothetical dual is, followed by the scenario of whom will beat whom on which date.  If you believe it to be "hypothetical," then why did you ask when the dual will be held and specify dates that someone will beat another person?

 

Are these not your own words?  "When is the hypothetical dual? If it's in late February Lee gets 6 on Schwarm and I could see Alber getting beat at 141. Sorensen and Kemerer + possibly Marinelli. Downey and Stoll would win as well." 

Edited by ban basketball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, I do, but my response was to you asking me WHEN this hypothetical dual is, followed by the scenario of whom will beat whom on which date.  If you believe it to be "hypothetical," then why did you ask when the dual will be held and specify dates that someone will beat another person?

 

Are these not your own words?  "When is the hypothetical dual? If it's in late February Lee gets 6 on Schwarm and I could see Alber getting beat at 141. Sorensen and Kemerer + possibly Marinelli. Downey and Stoll would win as well." 

 

Well you see lineups can be fluid based on injuries and transfers. For example, Spencer Lee recovering from a torn ACL or Pat Downey becoming eligible. A lineup can be much different on Dec 1 compared to March 1 so it would have quite an influence on this hypothetical dual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cael never said that nor did he ever trot out a line up where he didn't want to and try to win. Some of the biggest natty duals pushers, on the other hand, have been all too willing to put out line ups that scream out that they could care less about actually winning duals.

Maybe before you hopped on the bandwagon:

 

Cael Sanderson‏Verified account @caelsanderson

 

No to National Duals. Retweet if you agree. http://www.caelsanderson.com/blog/no-to-national-duals/ â€¦

7:15 PM - 9 Sep 2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cael declared that duals don't matter, so they don't. But I could see Iowa taking 149, 157, one of 165-197, 184, and HWT with more bonus due to 149, 157, and 184.

 

 

Cael never said that nor did he ever trot out a line up where he didn't want to and try to win. Some of the biggest natty duals pushers, on the other hand, have been all too willing to put out line ups that scream out that they could care less about actually winning duals.

 

 

 

Maybe before you hopped on the bandwagon:

 

Cael Sanderson‏Verified account @caelsanderson

 

No to National Duals. Retweet if you agree. http://www.caelsanderson.com/blog/no-to-national-duals/ â€¦

7:15 PM - 9 Sep 2012

 

 

 

You do realize, I hope, that there is a big difference between "duals don't matter" and "Say No to National Duals (as a format to decide National Championship)". You can't be this dense, or maybe you can. You are the P4P troll according to Flo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...